- This topic has 27 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 9 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
someone told me there was an article in the hamodia that related the following shaaloh that was asked to Rav Elyashuv shlit”a;
someone gave someone else a lift on erev shabbos. after the boiling hot weekend they came back to their car. when they opened the door they were overwhelmed by the smell of rotten chicken from a bag their passenger had left in the car on friday. the smell was so bad that they had to have the upholstery in their car replaced. the question is, does the person who received a luift have to pay for the cost of replacing the upholstery?
rav elyashuv shlit”a ruyles that yes, they do have to pay. may take on it is that this is equivalent to avno sakino umasao sheinichan al hagag venaphlu beruach metzuyah and they were mazik while they were falling down in which case the person who put them on the roof is chayav mishum esh.
the chicken has the potential to be mazik once exposed to the sun and rotted, the sun is like the ruach that blows the fire along / blows the item off the roof.
I have a different question;
What would be the halachah if the person with the bags came to the car owner on erev shabbos and said to them; can I please leave my bags in your car for an hour, I have some more shopping to do and need somewhere to leave them while I do the rest of my shopping. Then they forget to take the bags out of the car and the smell of the chicken damages the upholstery.
In this case the person brought the bags into the car bireshus, and he is a shoel on the car. Then he was mazik the car by not removing the bags. The question is – I think there is a ketzos somewhere who says that if I see your sheep in my chatzer and I intend to steal it via my chatzer – then I am not yet a ganav becuase I have done no maaseh genevah. In order for me to become a ganav I have to do a maaseh genevah – for example closing the door on the courtyard.
In the case of the chicken in the car – my initial leaving the chicken in the car is bireshus. Therefore the ‘not taking the chicken out of the car’ which is not a maaseh (mazik) – cannot by itself be a cause of me having to pay for the item that I am a shoel on (the car).
So my question is – do we say just as in the case of a ganav there must be a maaseh genevah – so too in the case of a shomer who is mazik there must be a maaseh hezek?
(The difference between this case the case of the hamodia is that when the person took the lift with their bags – there was never any agreement or arrangement between the passenger and the car owner. The bags were there becuase he was there and he was never explicitly machnis them bireshus.)
Any thoughts anyone 🙂
Oh i thought this was gonna be about Frank Francisco.
In either case, asking a shaila isn’t sufficient. The one who wishes to be compensated needs to bring the other party to Beis Din. Otherwise he can’t be forced to pay based upon a shaila alone.
I hear the shaila but I don’t chap why you’re saying that the guy becomes a shoel on the car. Either way this case is l’fum rihata a mefureshe mishna (Bava Kama 47a):
???? ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ???? ????
If when the guy brings it birshus the ba’al hachatzer is chayav then obviously when the ba’al hachatzer’s own stuff gets damaged it’s his own loss. L’mayseh I still hear a shaila because it could be if the bag was closed the ba’al ha-car isn’t expected to assume it’s something like chicken that can easily spoil. Or maybe it’s his achrayus to know, especially on Friday when everyone has chicken in their bags. Good shaila.
BTW I love these kinds of threads. Shkoyach.
I hear what you’re tayneh-ing. I feel like this prat is mefurash somewhere, I’m just not holding in the sugya. It’s a good klerr. Anyone here holding in Bava Kama? If I have time later I’ll see if I can find something.
I’m holding in Yoma so this is entirely off the top of my head.
I would say that he has an achrayus to get his stuff out of the chatzer by the agreed upon time and by leaving them there he is a ???? and is therefore chayav just like avno sakino umas’a’o. (the dikduk nazi in me cringes every time I talk yeshivish but who cares)
Itche – But pcoz taynehs good that by avno sakino umasa’o you fohrt (at least) have a ma’aseh to attach to the hezek that ultimately occurred as a result, mah she-ein ken over here the ma’aseh was done birshus.
seeing as the av here seems to be esh which always has a koach acher meurav bo therefore there is no requirement to have an original maaseh mazik?
I don’t think that’s mistavra.
pcoz: Yes, that was what I meant. Now that I think of it, though, you can also make him chayav for abusing the terms of the pikadon because by leaving his stuff there beyond the time he has reshus for, he is being ???? ?? ????? ????.
I mamish don’t chap why you are considering the car a pikadon. You let me leave something in your house, now I’ve borrowed your house?
pcoz – Come on – for that matter the whole world is a pikadon to you the moment you buy a shor, because you’re accepting to be shomer it from being mazik the rest of the world. Sorry, sounds a bit farfetched (my fave yidish word). Pashut pshat is you give me reshus to put my thing in your car, finished. I’m not borrowing anything.
As for your second chiluk, the koach to get spoiled is inherent in every chicken, so I’m not maskim to the chiluk. Besides it’s klohr that R’ Eliyashiv didn’t hold from this chiluk because he was mashveh it to avno sakino umasa’o.
Now your chiluk is getting balebatish…
Is it a ruach metzuya or not? That’s all that should matter.
Nu nu. I didn’t learn like that in Rashi anyway. Dachtzich Rashi means if I am responsible for watching it memeila I am the gorem of the damage by not watching it. Bichlal I learned the avos nezikin as klalim of when one is chayav as a gorem. I’m not holding but when I was that’s what I thought the most glatte pshat was. Hey, are you in Lakewood? Maybe we could chazer Bava Kama together.
yitay: fohrt means “still” not “at least”
pcoz: A chicken is uhlul to get spoiled. If we’re still arguing from avney sakiney u’masao spoilage is definitely a ruach metzuya. If you call the chatzer a pikadon, which dachtzich mir it should be, you are chayav for ruining it. M’manafshach.
I think you can actually shoehorn the chicken into all 4 of the avos.
I agree with Rabbi Elyashivs ruling and would like to add:
And if the passenger left a bag of money in the car, to what extent should the car owner have any connection after a weekend? I say zero. So anything monies needing to be spent having anything to do with the chicken, is totally in the domain of the passenger.
Hopefully, the passenger agreed to pay for the cleaning, anyway.
Itche – Takeh, although it’s fohrt used as ‘at least’ in the context of what I was saying. Anyway in my defense I was high when I wrote that. Also your yeshivish is very good for a sheigitz.
yitay: I’m a yeshiva educated shaigitz.
lol, i could say the same
I thought you said you were yeshivish.
I am a yeshivishe sheigitz.
But if you’re yeshivish i.e. you have the look you are by definition not a shaigetz no matter what you do.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.